20-02-2026, 04:43 PM
Theory
My speculation is that the recipes section You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. - You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. may be a multilingual glossary. Each subsection (assumed as words beginning with p) would then start by listing the different ways the object is pronounced, with both dialectal differences and language differences. The repeated words -such as "okedy okeedy"- would be similar to eachother because they represent a homophonic representation of the different ways that people call the same object.
An example of what I mean in english is something like this: (written with vowels in IPA to signify my attempt at some different dialects):
Bellis Perennis: Also Deɪzi, Deɪzɪ, Dɛɪzi, also Deese or Deezɛ, rarely called Deɪz aɪs, is found in...
(Bellis Perennis: Also "day-zee", "day-ziih", "dayy-zee", also "Deh-seh" or "Deh-ze", rarely called "Dayz eyes", is found in...)
Malus domestica: Pomme, Poma, also Apfel, Appel, sometimes Malum or mala, is found in....
How this fits with what's known about the VMS
Use Case
The use case for such a glossary is quite straightforward. The author wanted themself -or anyone who could understand the script- to be able to know the different names that people have for various things. If they lived in a fairly multicultural area, or an area with frequent through-traffic, having a knowledge of how certain things are called would be especially useful. I imagine there would be a LOT of overlapping names too (especially with plants and herbs), with one culture differentiating between two similar things where another doesn't.
Such a place could be somewhere like along the trading routes that ran between italy and western europe, with frequent travellers of various tongues. If the author wanted to buy, sell, acquire or find a specific plant for use, knowing that some people say "day-zee" and some say "Deh-Seh" or some people say "pomme" and others "Poma" is probably very useful.
Lower quality parchment/drawing/decoration
If the document was intended to be used, perhaps day to day, outside in the rain, during travels, during preperation of materials or other activities, as opposed to only read in an academic context, it makes sense to use a slightly less expensive material for this. It also could be a reason for the lower quality drawings and colouring. Why waste time making a perfectly decorated manual if theres a good chance it will smudge, or be ruined during the intended use?
I thought I would use this thread to discuss the merits of this theory (which i'm sure is not unique of course) but also to post some things that i've noticed that led me to it. The first of which is a re-transcribing of some of the first lines of subsections using a different alphabet, which i will post immediately under this post.
Looking for signs of this theory in the text
Effects of using a specific transliteration alphabet
When looking for words that are potentially similar to one another, the transliteration alphabet that you use has an effect. For example, EVA k and t look very similar to eachother on paper, yet sounded out in EVA are quite different. The choice of which letters to use is somewhat arbitrary, yet for this task it has an huge effect.
In order to make the transliterated alphabet easier to sound out, I'm adjusting the EVA and using that for these examples. As long as the transliteration is consistent, our choice of specific letter used to represent each symbol doesn't matter for these purposes. This is just to demonstrate the potential properties of the words.
For clarity, I will use BOTH the EVA and my adjusted version in any examples.
The adjustments to EVA and their reasoning
Adjusted EVA: k = tl, t = thl, l = th, y = -us / con-, m = ré / ch = er / sh = ér
The most important changes are to take similar looking Voynichese symbols and assign them letters that are closer in sound than in EVA.
l: based on it sort-of looking like a cursive greek theta ϑ or the letter thorn Þ (which often resembled wynn ƿ and y).[attachment=14283] I'm using "th" as it's easier to write.
m: looks like r with a flourish, similar to "re" or "te" in some manuscripts. I have chosen "ré" arbitrarily here, with an accented é only for clarity in examples.
k: splitting the gallows into two letters and assigning TL, simply based on it somewhat resembling a TL
t: again splitting the gallows, assigning L the same way as above but interpreting lL instead of TL, making THL
ch: assuming that c is actually e , and the crossbar is a property of h, so ch = eh . h looks like a small cursive r, so "ch" = "er"
sh: same assumptions as "ch", but s = é
q also gives plenty of issues, but for the purposes of this thread I am going to consider q to be a type of contraction, marker or punctuation instead of a plaintext letter. Something like "also, and, +". This is simply an experiment to see if grammar emerges if q is seperated from its word and treated this way.
Example You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. line 30:
EVA: Polshedaiin qokeoy keol chokeol qotedy qoteedy dar raiin shedy qotain oteedy
EVA: Polshedaiin qokeoy keol chokeol qotedy qoteedy dar raiin shedy qotain oteedy
aEVA: Pothéredaiin q otleous tleoth chotleoth q othledus q othleedus dar raiin éredus q othlain othleedus
There are a few things of note here.
1) Words that did not obviously relate to eachother in EVA suddenly seem far more alike. Compare "qokeoy / qoteedy" vs "otleous / othledus". It seems far more likely that some people may say "otleous" and some may say "othledus". Its less likely that someone may say "okeoy" and someone else says "oteedy".
2) Words similar to the constituent parts of "Pothéredaiin" are found after "dar raiin". P-oth-éred-aiin contains "éred" and "oth-aiin", and "éredus" and "othlain" are seen in the sentence. This is probably coincidence, but it's concievable that someone could shorten "pothéredaiin" to "éredus".
3) The first words to not be part of a string of similar repeated words is "dar raiin". The structure is something like (repeated words),(repeated words), dar raiin (slightly different words). I will discuss this further on, but this structure matches other first lines of other subsections.
Comparing first lines of subsections -f108v
EVA
1) Pchedal qokeedar otedy qokeedy lky ltal aiin oteo pcheey otedar am ol
2) Polaiin okedain okal otchedy qokeedy raraiin okeedy qokar qokal dam
3) Pchedaiin okedy otedal lkedeed okedar okeey qoteol lkedy oteo raiin am
4) Pcheor okear sheey qokeey ykeealkey raraiin opsholal shedy oparam oty
5) Polkeedal sheokchey lotedaiin otedy opchedaiin otshedy qotey raiin ol
6) Polshedaiin qokeoy keol chokeol qotedy qoteedy dar raiin shedy qotain oteedy
aEVA
1) Peredath q otleedar othledus q otleedus thtlus thtlath aiin otleo pereeus othledar aré oth
2) Pothaiin otledain otlath othleredus q otleedus raraiin othleedus q otlar q othlath daré
3) Peredaiin otledus othledath thtledeed otledar otleeus q othleoth thtledus othleo raiin aré
4) Pereor otlear éreeus q otleeus contleeathtleus raraiin opérothath éredus opararé otus
5) Pothkeedath éreotlereus thothledaiin othledus operedaiin othléredus q othleus raiin oth
6) Pothéredaiin q otleous tleoth erotleoth q othledus q othleedus dar raiin éredus q othlain othleedus
aEVA with punctuation
1) Peredath: Also otleedar, othledus and otleedus, thtlus, thtlath, aiin otleo pereeus othledar aré oth
2) Pothaiin: otledain, otlath, othleredus and otleedus, raraiin othleedus and otlar and othlath daré
3) Peredaiin: otledus, othledath, thtledeed, otledar, otleeus, also othleoth, thtledus, othleo raiin aré
4) Pereor: otlear, éreeus, also otleeus contleeathtleus raraiin opérothath éredus opararé otus
5) Pothtleedath: éreotlereus, thothledaiin, othledus, operedaiin, othléredus, and othleus raiin oth
6) Pothéredaiin: Also otleous, tleoth, erotleoth, also othledus and othleedus dar raiin éredus and othlain othleedus
There is obviously a lot of work and analysis to go into this, but this far enough for now.
Edit: it seems that posting a reply simply adds it to the OP, oh well
My speculation is that the recipes section You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. - You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. may be a multilingual glossary. Each subsection (assumed as words beginning with p) would then start by listing the different ways the object is pronounced, with both dialectal differences and language differences. The repeated words -such as "okedy okeedy"- would be similar to eachother because they represent a homophonic representation of the different ways that people call the same object.
An example of what I mean in english is something like this: (written with vowels in IPA to signify my attempt at some different dialects):
Bellis Perennis: Also Deɪzi, Deɪzɪ, Dɛɪzi, also Deese or Deezɛ, rarely called Deɪz aɪs, is found in...
(Bellis Perennis: Also "day-zee", "day-ziih", "dayy-zee", also "Deh-seh" or "Deh-ze", rarely called "Dayz eyes", is found in...)
Malus domestica: Pomme, Poma, also Apfel, Appel, sometimes Malum or mala, is found in....
How this fits with what's known about the VMS
Use Case
The use case for such a glossary is quite straightforward. The author wanted themself -or anyone who could understand the script- to be able to know the different names that people have for various things. If they lived in a fairly multicultural area, or an area with frequent through-traffic, having a knowledge of how certain things are called would be especially useful. I imagine there would be a LOT of overlapping names too (especially with plants and herbs), with one culture differentiating between two similar things where another doesn't.
Such a place could be somewhere like along the trading routes that ran between italy and western europe, with frequent travellers of various tongues. If the author wanted to buy, sell, acquire or find a specific plant for use, knowing that some people say "day-zee" and some say "Deh-Seh" or some people say "pomme" and others "Poma" is probably very useful.
Lower quality parchment/drawing/decoration
If the document was intended to be used, perhaps day to day, outside in the rain, during travels, during preperation of materials or other activities, as opposed to only read in an academic context, it makes sense to use a slightly less expensive material for this. It also could be a reason for the lower quality drawings and colouring. Why waste time making a perfectly decorated manual if theres a good chance it will smudge, or be ruined during the intended use?
I thought I would use this thread to discuss the merits of this theory (which i'm sure is not unique of course) but also to post some things that i've noticed that led me to it. The first of which is a re-transcribing of some of the first lines of subsections using a different alphabet, which i will post immediately under this post.
Looking for signs of this theory in the text
Effects of using a specific transliteration alphabet
When looking for words that are potentially similar to one another, the transliteration alphabet that you use has an effect. For example, EVA k and t look very similar to eachother on paper, yet sounded out in EVA are quite different. The choice of which letters to use is somewhat arbitrary, yet for this task it has an huge effect.
In order to make the transliterated alphabet easier to sound out, I'm adjusting the EVA and using that for these examples. As long as the transliteration is consistent, our choice of specific letter used to represent each symbol doesn't matter for these purposes. This is just to demonstrate the potential properties of the words.
For clarity, I will use BOTH the EVA and my adjusted version in any examples.
The adjustments to EVA and their reasoning
Adjusted EVA: k = tl, t = thl, l = th, y = -us / con-, m = ré / ch = er / sh = ér
The most important changes are to take similar looking Voynichese symbols and assign them letters that are closer in sound than in EVA.
l: based on it sort-of looking like a cursive greek theta ϑ or the letter thorn Þ (which often resembled wynn ƿ and y).[attachment=14283] I'm using "th" as it's easier to write.
m: looks like r with a flourish, similar to "re" or "te" in some manuscripts. I have chosen "ré" arbitrarily here, with an accented é only for clarity in examples.
k: splitting the gallows into two letters and assigning TL, simply based on it somewhat resembling a TL
t: again splitting the gallows, assigning L the same way as above but interpreting lL instead of TL, making THL
ch: assuming that c is actually e , and the crossbar is a property of h, so ch = eh . h looks like a small cursive r, so "ch" = "er"
sh: same assumptions as "ch", but s = é
q also gives plenty of issues, but for the purposes of this thread I am going to consider q to be a type of contraction, marker or punctuation instead of a plaintext letter. Something like "also, and, +". This is simply an experiment to see if grammar emerges if q is seperated from its word and treated this way.
Example You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. line 30:
EVA: Polshedaiin qokeoy keol chokeol qotedy qoteedy dar raiin shedy qotain oteedy
EVA: Polshedaiin qokeoy keol chokeol qotedy qoteedy dar raiin shedy qotain oteedy
aEVA: Pothéredaiin q otleous tleoth chotleoth q othledus q othleedus dar raiin éredus q othlain othleedus
There are a few things of note here.
1) Words that did not obviously relate to eachother in EVA suddenly seem far more alike. Compare "qokeoy / qoteedy" vs "otleous / othledus". It seems far more likely that some people may say "otleous" and some may say "othledus". Its less likely that someone may say "okeoy" and someone else says "oteedy".
2) Words similar to the constituent parts of "Pothéredaiin" are found after "dar raiin". P-oth-éred-aiin contains "éred" and "oth-aiin", and "éredus" and "othlain" are seen in the sentence. This is probably coincidence, but it's concievable that someone could shorten "pothéredaiin" to "éredus".
3) The first words to not be part of a string of similar repeated words is "dar raiin". The structure is something like (repeated words),(repeated words), dar raiin (slightly different words). I will discuss this further on, but this structure matches other first lines of other subsections.
Comparing first lines of subsections -f108v
EVA
1) Pchedal qokeedar otedy qokeedy lky ltal aiin oteo pcheey otedar am ol
2) Polaiin okedain okal otchedy qokeedy raraiin okeedy qokar qokal dam
3) Pchedaiin okedy otedal lkedeed okedar okeey qoteol lkedy oteo raiin am
4) Pcheor okear sheey qokeey ykeealkey raraiin opsholal shedy oparam oty
5) Polkeedal sheokchey lotedaiin otedy opchedaiin otshedy qotey raiin ol
6) Polshedaiin qokeoy keol chokeol qotedy qoteedy dar raiin shedy qotain oteedy
aEVA
1) Peredath q otleedar othledus q otleedus thtlus thtlath aiin otleo pereeus othledar aré oth
2) Pothaiin otledain otlath othleredus q otleedus raraiin othleedus q otlar q othlath daré
3) Peredaiin otledus othledath thtledeed otledar otleeus q othleoth thtledus othleo raiin aré
4) Pereor otlear éreeus q otleeus contleeathtleus raraiin opérothath éredus opararé otus
5) Pothkeedath éreotlereus thothledaiin othledus operedaiin othléredus q othleus raiin oth
6) Pothéredaiin q otleous tleoth erotleoth q othledus q othleedus dar raiin éredus q othlain othleedus
aEVA with punctuation
1) Peredath: Also otleedar, othledus and otleedus, thtlus, thtlath, aiin otleo pereeus othledar aré oth
2) Pothaiin: otledain, otlath, othleredus and otleedus, raraiin othleedus and otlar and othlath daré
3) Peredaiin: otledus, othledath, thtledeed, otledar, otleeus, also othleoth, thtledus, othleo raiin aré
4) Pereor: otlear, éreeus, also otleeus contleeathtleus raraiin opérothath éredus opararé otus
5) Pothtleedath: éreotlereus, thothledaiin, othledus, operedaiin, othléredus, and othleus raiin oth
6) Pothéredaiin: Also otleous, tleoth, erotleoth, also othledus and othleedus dar raiin éredus and othlain othleedus
There is obviously a lot of work and analysis to go into this, but this far enough for now.
Edit: it seems that posting a reply simply adds it to the OP, oh well